CSX4000 roller for $39.9K?

[CSX 4039]

Coke sends the syrup (CSX number) out and licenses the Coca Cola to be manufactured at many locally owned bottling companies (CAV).

signed,
Just trying to be a pain in the ash....
(not doubt successful)

[David Kirkham]

Bandit 1, Mr. Bruce,

SPF handles better? I would certainly like to see some data on that. The drivers I have spoken to do not agree, (specifically, Dave Dralle). I, personally, am not qualified to answer this as I am not a race car driver.

Crashes better? Bent frame rails? I think everyone knows that straight is stiffer than bent--(remember the little ding in an aluminum can when you are standing on it?). If bent is going to be as stiff it has to be reinforced--read heavier. Crashes better? Well again, I'd really like to see some data.

Performs better: I think the SPF actually is quite a bit heaver than an original car. Our cars weigh 2248lbs dry--(Car and Driver, Willow Springs scales--iron heads, iron block even). (When that car was weighed, our cars very virtually identical to an original.) Car and Driver states weights wil a full load of fuel on board so they added 42 gallons of fuel to the weight of the car when they printed it.)

Lately, we have taken almost 100 lbs out of the car with the new billet aluminum parts. Add aluminum heads on top of that and we are pushing 2100 lbs. Anyone know how much a SPF weighs? I would really like to know. Of course, my goal is to some day make one of our cars weigh less than 2000 lbs. Don't laugh--it only makes me try harder...

Don't take any of this as my bashing SPF. I have stated on this forum many, many times SPF, (and others) make great products. I have seen their products and I have driven them. I am just a data oriented person. I like to see numbers. The only way to really improve anything is to measure it and to figure out how to make it better.

All I know is I am glad I am not building fiberglass cars...

David

[CSX 4027]

You guys kill me. I bet few of you actually race these cars and those that dream of it will not be able to vintage race any of these cars due to the fact they are not vintage cars. M ost just go for a quick blast down a parkway hoping to not get grabbed for an insurance guzzling ticket.

Chassis??? Please if you are looking for a modern handeling safe chassis, why buy a Cobra? Buy a new Nizzan Z or something.

Crashes? It seems that there are a lot of crashes out there in the kit car world and guess what? Most of them are other than Shelby. Go over to the Dan's Superformance Dealer on Long Island and look around. I am sure you will see a few wrecked cars and ask them abouit the previously wrecked cars.

What about fuel cells????
Not even your modern every day cars have fuel cells.

What about urethane or rubber bushed suspensions?
Hey that little bit of flex would bother me on the track. Would any of you know the difference on the street? I doubt it..

Did you ever go for a ride in an original Cobra with Bondurant, Gurney or Smith behind the wheel? I think the original suspension would surprise you. It was stiff enough and guess what. Today Shelbys are made even stiffer than the original.

So what's the point?

[Turk]

The point is.......
My Harley crashes better than a Suzuki.
Guiess what? Bad crashes in both if you ask me.
That is without roill bars of course!

TURK

[Tom T.]

Stiffness schmiffness. My Contemporary had a little flex and I just factored it into my suspension adjustments! Whooooooooooopeeeeeeeeeeee! You want a stiff chassis and great handling? Get a Z06! During my second run in that car I was entering turns 20-30% faster than I ever did in the ROADSTER. And, waiting in the hot pits with the AC on and the CD player belting out the tunes is verrrrrrrrrry relaxing. So why do I miss Old Red so much? Because I'm sick, demented, just like ALL of the rest of you maniacs. Kirkham hybrid with aluminum block 427...CSX 4700 series car...my kids will never go to college at this rate.

Peace,

TT

[CSX 4027]

College??
I had a stiffness in College. My chassis didn't flex!!

[Lew Ledyard]

Response to David K's post about weight:

If your cars are in the 2100 lb range with aluminum heads but iron block, where are they with aluminum diffs and aluminum blocks? That has to be getting close to 2040-50lb.

[Excaliber]

When it comes to perfromance, weight is EVERYTHING! That was the key reason the original Cobra was SO good on the track.

Ernie

[MotoCobra]

Well...hasn't this turned out to be a rather interesting thread?

About crashes and Cobras (and Cobra replicas, of-course...):

1. I'm willing to bet that the safest car of all choices (readily available choices, that is!) is the FFR Spec. Racer. I've seen a few take a good hit or "roll"(!) and in many cases DRIVE AWAY! Oh, and by the way, a Spec. Racer's looks are reminiscent of the '62/289 that Augie Pabst drove at Nassau...kinda cool!

2. As for the Round v. Square argument? I'm not going to fly in the face of the AEROSPACE guys that determined a long time ago (...in a galaxy far, far away...) that on a lb. for lb. basis: Round wins!

3. Mr. Kirkham, please don't let the fact that you build the best Aluminum (Aluminium to our British friends) Cobra blur your ideals or potential! I WISH you'd build a composite Cobra; however, a GRAPHITE (Carbon-fiber to the rest of us) car/body from pre-impregnated Aerospace grade materials. Not to mention Composite panels and components through-out.

1800# car in a heart-beat! Stiffer and better mass centralization would be other likely benefits...

Now, that would be a lighter/better car. It would also put and end to some of this..."My car's better than yours!" stuff.

Oh, and a question for all...don't Kirkham cars get in "The Registry"? And doesn't that reslove the issue of,"Only Carroll Shelby can build a Cobra"? After all, that's one of the points of the whole name/licensing/who's really building a cobra...isn't it?

Your opinions are always welcome here!

Manny

[Tom T.]

Impregnated, eh....likely story.

TT

[mrmustang]

Steve,

So what about that new sponsor of yours:


Any free samples.

Bill S.

Originally posted by CSX 4027


College??
I had a stiffness in College. My chassis didn't flex!!

[mr bruce]

Crashes better? Dam straight!. pick up a Nascar rulebook, or check out the SCCA Trans-am rules .There are specific rules for the angles of "kick-up", the frames are fabricated of reqtangular tubing , welded and diamond gusseted at the joints.These cars are built to crush in the front in a crash, better for the car to absorb the impact than a driver sliding foward on a bucket seat into the dash and beyond.Confident of the crash worthy ness of your straight rail chassis into a wall, front on, say 35mph ? You don't want to go there. I'll supply one of my Nascar spec frames for the test,will you? The point is, the ERA and SPF cars(and others) have this kick-up built into the frames, so they should absorb impacts better than the staight rail cars.

[BANDIT 1]

Mr. Real 1:

My Cobra won by about a car length against my modified 2001 Hayabusa (and my friends 2002 GSXR-1000) from 65 mph to 145 mph on the hiway (this was a 4 lane hiway at 2:30 in the morning with NO vehicles anywhere near us and we were seperated by 2 lanes in the middle, judge if you like...). From a standstill the Hayabusa beats my Cobra (with the Drag Radials) by a liitle less than a second.

Mr. Kirkham:

I don't want to get in any big (Evan-like) debates about the chassis differences with you because I realy respect you and your Kirkham Cobra. You have shown class every time I have seen you on Club Cobra.

What I have said is this, if someone comes on Club Cobra and asks about the difference in the Cobra maufacturer's I give information that they all have their place in the Cobra eco-system. Once I start saying that the Superformance Cobra WAS NOT designed to be a "exact copy" of the original Cobra and instead is a modern Cobra with different chassis design, etc... BAMMM all of a sudden i'm putting down the original Cobra's (according to some).

Are we all saying that it is impossible to make a 35 year old chassis better?

If the 427 FE engine is so much better than a 460 engine, why does it cost 3 times the money for the same horsepower? Have all the technological advances on the 385 series engine still not made a engine as good as a 30 year old 427 FE engine?

Is the Superformance Cobra's brake system not as good as the "original"?

Are the Olthoff's "racing" shocks, suspension pieces, etc... and the constant modifications still make the Superformance Cobra perform not as good as the "original"?

Can a "original-like" Kirkham Cobra with 15" tires and a 550 horsepower 427 FE engine (4-speed Top loader) outperform a Superformance Cobra with 17" tires and a 550 horsepower 351 "stroker" engine (Tremec TKO II 5-speed)?

What would you call a modern 550 horsepower 351 "stroker" engined, Tremec TKO II 5-speed, modern square tube frame, custom suspension, custom cooling system, modern braked Cobra with 17" tires? All I have called it is a "modern Cobra". It is obvious this car was not designed to be a exact "replica".

All I have said is for the same amount of money (because the aluminum body/FE engine is so expensive) you can build a faster Superformance Cobra than a Kirham or Shelby Cobra. Even the new CAV Shelby Cobra's will all have 427/428 engines in them.

[Edley Rondinone]

"Schmiffness"!! I LIKE that word!! Might even change my byline to Edley "Schmiffness" Rondinone!! (Thanks, Tom T.!) Now, this thread has been thread-jacked what, three or four times? I still gotta go with "Schmiffness"!

[computerworks]

Originally posted by BANDIT 1

What would you call a modern 550 horsepower 351 "stroker" engined, Tremec TKO II 5-speed, modern square tube frame, custom suspension, custom cooling system, modern braked Cobra with 17" tires?

...a Hot Rod.

That's not bad, mind you, but at some point it ceases to be a replica and becomes a modern, high-performance platform.

It's a "Cobra" because of the body shell... but pop that off and mount a T-bucket and you have a pretty cool Street Rod.

That's the apples-and-oranges thing, again.

[REAL 1]

"Evan Like" debate. I like that.

Bandit: As Ron pointed out what you have is a specially prepared modern hot rod built beyond the original performance specs, at least from an accelaration standpoint, of the origninal or continuation series Cobras utilizing origninal spec FE drive trains. Why anyone needs more than 500 hp in a 2400 lbs car is beyond me unless you intend to seriously drag race it at the track. But to each their own.

From a handling standpoint and performance standpoint my questions were more directed at a standard SPF with a basic 460 or 351. How and why do they out perform a CSX? Wheres the proof or data to support that?

As to crash worthiness? You guys can't be serious. None of these chasis meet current federal crash worthiness requirments nor have or is there any survivability data on these cars, at least to my knowledge. It would seem to me that if your'e crashing hard enough to deform any of the chasis we are talking about here your'e in deep dodo in any of these cars. In short, deforming or non deforming if your slammed by a Suburban head on you'll be just as dead whether your frame rails remain strainght or whether they bent at pre-determined points.

Get REAL.

[Excaliber]

Mine does,,,the Excalibur. Uh,,,,,,wait, I think they got an "exemption" on the part and when it ran out they lost the federal approval.

....carry on.

Ernie

[CSX 4027]

We didn't have Viagra back then. We had 714's..

[speedraser]

Wow, this is a contentious group! All of the following is just my humble opinion.

Let me state up front that, Mr. Kirkham, I LOVE your cars.

To me, the only truly faithful replicas of the original Cobra are the Kirkhams and the aluminum Shelbys. These are the only newly-built "Cobras" that allow the owner virtually to go back to the '60s and buy the same basic machine -- chassis, body, suspension and engine -- that was sold then (aside from the various improvements in materials, etc.). This is VERY desirable -- to me. If I decide that I want the entire experience of the original Cobra without owning an original, I will buy a Kirkham or an aluminum Shelby.

Any non-aluminum body makes it substantially different -- to me. Not necessarily better or worse, or more or less desirable, just different. To me, a 'glass Shelby is too different from an original for me to place greater importance on its being a "real Shelby" than on all the other aspects of the car. The "real Shelby" thing is appealing, but it's not the only factor. Therefore, things such as the chassis design, from a performance and possibly even a crashworthiness viewpoint (absurd as that may seem to some), become considerations -- to me. If I decide to buy a 'glass Cobra, it will be either a Shelby, ERA or SPF based on my evaluation of the entire car (and each company).

Most of what I've read and heard indicates that the original chassis design is really quite excellent from a handling standpoint, remarkably so for something designed so long ago. I would love to see a comparison test among Kirkham/Shelby (alum or 'glass), ERA and SPF since these are the cars on my shortlist. ERA's chassis design is held in high regard by nearly everyone in the Cobra world, and I have yet to hear anyone denigrate it who can support his negative opinion. The criticism usually is restricted to "round frames are better" (the same criticism usually aimed at SPF's chassis). ERA has very clear, engineering-based reasons for designing their chassis with rectangular rails -- this is discussed extensively on their website. They discuss the various advantages and disadvantages of round and square tubes, and explain why they made their choice.

I DON'T KNOW whether ERA's or SPF's chassis are stronger or weaker, stiffer or limper, than each other's or than the original chassis design as seen under Shelbys and Kirkhams. I don't know which is the best handling. I do know that they are all different, and that each will, therefore, have its own performance/handling characteristics.

Crashworthiness:
Well, this is quite the volatile topic...

I have no delusions that ANY Cobra is a great choice of car in which to have a crash. Nevertheless, the wide variance among designs surely means that some will perform better than others in a crash. Even if I cannot expect to walk out of a major high-speed impact in any Cobra, it is quite possible that a not-so-massive crash in Cobra Brand A may result in far more injury to the occupants than that same crash in Cobra Brand B. A different crash may show B to be worse than A. We cannot know whether we will ever have an accident in a Cobra, nor how severe that crash might be. Someone posted that hitting a Suburban in any Cobra will kill you. That's probably true, but if I hit a Civic or a Maxima, I may have a better chance in one Cobra than in another. My point is that some Cobras are likely safer (or less dangerous) than others.

All relatively modern road and race cars are designed to absorb impact forces in a somewhat "controlled" manner. This is, of course, done by designing a "crush zone" into the structure that is designed to deform and absorb the impact rather than sending it straight to the passengers. Cars that have separate chassis frames accomplish this by designing an area (or areas) that will bend when hit hard enough. This is done by having a "kickup" or similar bend in the chassis -- it is at that kickup that the designed-in deformation will occur. Obviously, the chassis is also designed so that the deformation will stop before the cockpit starts to deform. ERA and SPF (among others) have chassis designs that incorporate this kickup. ERA and SPF both discuss crumple zones in their literature.

The original Cobra chassis design was completed well before anyone put much thought into crashworthiness. Whereas the ERA and SPF chassis run the entire length of the cars (bumper to bumper), the original chassis' main tubes run only from the rear axle to just a few inches ahead of the front axle line. Ahead of the main tubes is relatively little structure -- just the much smaller tubes that support the radiator and the body. Behind the main tubes is also a structure of tubes, much smaller than the main rails, that only support the body. In an impact hard enough to crush the car into the main rails, there is no provision for controlling the crash energy, and I have no clue how and where those straight rails will bend.

I do clearly recall reading an article about the AC MkIV when it was new. It stated that the chassis was identical to the original design EXCEPT that a "sheer point" had to be added somewhere in the chassis to allow it to "give" in order to pass the required barrier crash test.

Based on all of this, it seems likely TO ME that an ERA or SPF would better protect its occupants in a front-end or rear-end crash than a Cobra with the original chassis design. The difference may be significant, negligible, or anywhere in between. I could very well be wrong -- perhaps, through pure luck, the original chassis would do better in an impact. Chassis design is one of many factors that affect crashworthiness. Chassis rail thickness, tube size, and material are others. None of these cars look like they'd offer much protection in a side impact. Obviously, the fiberglass used in the body would be a factor, and surely aluminum behaves differently than 'glass. I do believe, however, that the chassis plays a far more significant role in this than does the body material.

The crashworthiness question is by no means my first priority in deciding which Cobra to buy. I know that some companies, such as West Coast/Stallion, place a significant emphasis on this. For various reasons, I have narrowed my choice to ERA, SPF, Kirkham and Shelby ('glass or alum). I don't think that any of these is a "crashworthy" car by any modern standard. I do believe that there may be differences between them (handling and crashworthiness) and that the chassis is something to consider.

Cheers to all.

P.S. Mr. Kirkham, I LOVE your cars.

[ST]

It's been interesting (but no surprise) to see this thread go from what a great idea SAI has to compete in the market place to "my fake is better than your fake".

BTW back to the reason I started this thread......it sold for $38950, somebody got a great deal.